Selvitella v. City of South San Francisco, California et al

Filing 92

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' 59 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON PLAINTIFF'S § 1983 CLAIM. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 5/25/2011. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/25/2011)

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

JAMES SELVITELLA,

5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12

No. C 08-04388 CW

Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, et
al.,

ORDER GRANTING
DEFENDANTS' MOTION
FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT ON
PLAINTIFF'S § 1983
CLAIM
(Docket No. 59)

Defendants and
Respondents.
________________________________/
Because the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed this Court's
denial of Plaintiff's petition for a writ of mandamus under

13
California Code of Procedure § 1094.5, the Court grants
14
15
16

Defendants' pending motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff's
remaining claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
BACKGROUND

17
18

Docket No. 59.

Plaintiff and Petitioner James Selvitella sought a writ of

19

mandamus under § 1094.5, in an effort to override the decision by

20

the Personnel Board of the City of South San Francisco to

21

terminate his employment as Battalion Chief of the City's Fire

22
Department.

In addition to his petition for a writ of mandamus,

23
24

Plaintiff alleged a claim under § 1983.

Defendants and

25

Respondents City of South San Francisco, Personnel Board of the

26

City of South San Francisco, South San Francisco Fire Department,

27

Barry M. Nagel, Marty Van Duyn and Phillip White opposed the

28

1

petition and moved for summary judgment on Plaintiff's § 1983

2

claim.

3

deferred its ruling on Defendants' motion for summary judgment.

4

Accordingly, the Court instructed the clerk to enter a

5

Rule 54(b) judgment against Plaintiff on his § 1094.5 claim and,

6

The Court denied Plaintiff's petition for a writ and

after the clerk did so, Plaintiff pursued an appeal before the

7
Ninth Circuit.

On March 28, 2011, the Ninth Circuit issued a

8
9

judgment affirming this Court's denial of Plaintiff's petition for

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

a writ of mandamus under § 1094.5, and on April 19, 2011, the

11

Ninth Circuit's judgment took effect, pursuant to Rule 41(a) of

12

the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

13

Defendants' motion for summary judgment to resolve Plaintiff's

14

remaining claim under § 1983.

The Court now rules on

15
The Court's prior order, denying Plaintiff's petition for a
16
writ, also found that his claim under § 1983 could be barred by
17
18

collateral estoppel given the denial of the writ petition.

19

Court first made a threshold finding that the proceedings before

20

the Personnel Board satisfied the fairness requirements set forth

21

in Utah Construction & Minning Co., 384 U.S. 394 (1966).

22

11-12.

23

The

Order at

The Court then determined that two of the three

requirements for application of collateral estoppel under

24
California law were satisfied.

Id. at 12-13.

However, the Court

25
26

found that the third requirement--that the first proceeding ended

27

with a final judgment on the merits--was not fulfilled because its

28

decision on the § 1094.5 claim would not be a final judgment on
2

1

the merits until an appeal from the Court's judgment had been

2

exhausted or the time to appeal expired.

3

discovery and a full jury trial on the § 1983 claim without

4

waiting for a final judgment on the § 1094.5 claim risked

5

unnecessarily wasting the parties' and the Court's resources, the

6

Because proceeding to

Court held that entry of judgment, pursuant to Federal Rule of

7
Civil Procedure 54(b), solely on the § 1094.5 claim was warranted.
8
9

As noted earlier, after the clerk entered judgment on the § 1094.5

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

claim, Plaintiff pursued an appeal that was ultimately

11

unsuccessful.

12
13
14

CONCLUSION
Given that Plaintiff exhausted his appeal and this Court's
judgment denying his § 1094.5 claim is now final, the third

15
requirement for application of collateral estoppel to the
16
remaining § 1983 claim has been satisfied.

Accordingly, the Court

17
18

GRANTS summary judgment on Plaintiff's § 1983 claim in favor of

19

Defendants.

20

Defendants on Plaintiff's § 1983 claim.

21

their own costs.

Docket No. 59.

The clerk shall enter judgment for
The parties shall bear

22
IT IS SO ORDERED.
23
24
Dated:
25

5/25/2011

CLAUDIA WILKEN
United States District Judge

26
27
28
3